From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a list of contiguous urban areas of the world ranked according to population. Figures have been taken from two sources: Demographia's "World Urban Areas" study,[1] and from citypopulation.de, created by Thomas Brinkhoff of the Institut für Angewandte Photogrammetrie und Geoinformatik.[2]

Transcription

This is Wendover Productions. Sponsored by the Great Courses Plus.
Here’s an interesting question: which city
do you think is more dense—Paris, France
or New York, United States?
It probably seems obvious: New York, the land
of skyscrapers, the Big Apple… right?
Wrong.
New York, in fact, has a population density
of less than half that of Paris.
Paris’s is 56,000 people per square mile
(22,000 per square kilometer) while New York’s
is only 27,000 people per square mile (10,500
per square kilometer.)
To find a European city with a comparable
population density to New York’s—the densest
American city—you have to go all the way
down to number six on the list: Lyon France
(27,000 per sq/mile; 10,500 per sq/km.)
New York of course has a super-dense urban
core, but then around it is miles and miles
of suburbia—just like almost every other
American city.
Paris, on the other hand, packs almost its
entire population into a compact urban core.
There’s also another interesting pattern
that differs between the two continents: rich
Americans live outside the city, rich Europeans
live city center.
Compare the income map of Paris to that of
Philadelphia.
Of course it’s not perfect, but you can
definitely see a pattern.
The most commonly cited reason for both these
trends is the difference in age.
Most European cities have existed for hundreds
if not thousands of years, while all but a
few American cities only gathered enough population
to be called cities in the past one or two
hundred years.
What that means is that European cities existed
when all but the super-rich had to commute
to work by foot.
In the middle ages, Paris had a population
of two to three hundred thousand people, but
you could walk from one side to the other
in thirty minutes.
It was incredibly densely populated.
You just had to live within walking distance
of work.
Therefore, the rich paid more for the houses
closest to the center of the city.
This is a similar reason to why in historic
European hotels, you’ll often see the nicest
and largest rooms on the lower floors—the
opposite of what you’d see today.
Before elevators existed, the rich didn’t
want to have to walk up as many flights of
stairs.
Walking distance was not only important to
big cities.
Small villages across Europe were almost always
the same size because their population was
dictated by the walkability of the surrounding
fields.
European farmers tended to live in small towns
and walk to their fields during the day rather
than the homesteading approach used in America.
Therefore, villages would only be as large
as the amount of people needed to work the
fields within walking distance.
American cities, on the other hand, began
their period of rapid growth in a more modern
era when decentralizing technologies were
much more advanced.
By the time North American cities grew larger
than the distance people could reasonably
walk, there was already the technological
capability to create public transportation
systems.
The first major public transportation innovation
was the steam train in the mid 19th century.
This was a very expensive means of transport
and was therefore only for the super rich.
Interestingly, because steam trains take an
enormous amount of time to reach speed, the
towns that the rich commuted from, known as
railroad suburbs, were generally not just
at the nearest bit of countryside, but separated
from the city by a few miles of countryside.
The impact of railroad suburbs remains today.
On the track of the old Philadelphia Main
Line, there’s a stretch of super-rich communities
with huge estates and country clubs from Ardmore
to Malvern.
The demographics just never changed from the
time of the railroad suburb.
A few decades later, streetcars emerged and
quickly became an instrumental part of the
American commute.
Much like steam trains, streetcars also created
new communities—this time with slightly
less rich upper-middle class individuals.
In Washington DC, the wealthy suburbs of Tenleytown,
Chevy Chase, Bethesda, McLean, Rockville,
and more all grew as a result of the streetcar.
But once again, walking distance influenced
geography.
Streetcar commuters had to live within walking
distance of a stop, so naturally there would
be a radius of civilization about 20 or 30
minutes walking distance from a stop, then
past that…nothing.
That meant that between the lines, there was
all this open space where nobody could commute
from.
Enter: the automobile.
At first the car was only for upper class
individuals especially with the distraction
of the two World Wars and Great Depression,
however, by the time young Americans returned
from World War Two, there had been enough
technological advances to make the automobile
affordable for the middle class.
Over 50% of households had cars by 1950.
At the same time, the government was offering
loans to returning veterans which significantly
increased the number of americans who could
afford to buy homes.
Instead of buying a small central city home,
this generation opted to use their new cars
to commute from cheaper, nicer, and larger
suburban homes.
The idea was that the working parents would
go downtown each day while the rest of the
family would stay to enjoy the suburb.
It was the perfect deal.
So that whole history was absolutely true,
but it doesn’t entirely explain why European
cities didn't experience suburbanization as
well.
In Germany, for example, many, if not most,
cities were bombed to rubble during World
War Two.
They had the opportunity to rebuild in any
way they wanted, but then chose to keep their
compact design.
Today, the average metropolitan population
density in Germany is four times higher than
the US’s.
At the same time, other cities across Europe
that survived the war experienced enormous
population influxes and still maintained their
mammoth population densities.
Perhaps the least commonly cited reason for
suburbanization in the US is crime.
It’s a bit of an ugly period in American
history that we sometimes forget, but crime
levels were absolutely insane in the 70’s,
80’s, and 90’s.
There are a ton of different theories for
why this was—perhaps the most interesting
being the that the rise in gasoline emitted
lead caused lower IQ’s and higher aggressively.
New York had an astronomical 2,245 murders
in 1990.
London didn’t even have that many in the
entire 90’s decade.
Violent crime rates are still consistently
10 or more times higher in the US.
In 1992, a poll was conducted asking departing
New Yorkers why they were moving to the suburbs,
and the most commonly cited reason was crime
at 47%.
Cost and quality of living were way down at
lower than 10% each.
Crime rates are significantly lower in suburbs
as they are typically havens for higher-income
individuals.
Europeans don’t have to worry as much about
inter-city crime so they’re much more willing
to live downtown.
Land for suburban housing is also readily
available in the US because farmers have always
been quick to sell their relatively unprofitable
land to developers.
By contrast, In France, for example, agricultural
subsidies are 12 times higher per acre of
land than the US.
That’s a big reason why large European cities
are still closely surrounded by small farms.
In many European cities, you can literally
take the city bus to farms.
Lastly, all sorts of energy are cheaper in
the US.
A gallon of gas costs as much as $7 in some
parts of Europe compared to the US average
of $2.20.
It’s significantly more expensive to commute
by car in Europe so there’s more motivation
to live closer to work where either the drive
is shorter or you can take public transportation.
Also, big suburban homes aren’t as attractive
in Europe because electricity and heating
costs are higher.
Suburban life really didn’t live up to expectations.
Americans now spend an average of 4.25 hours
per week sitting in cars, buses, or trains
traveling to and from work.
That’s 2.5% of their entire lives.
It’s also been scientifically proven that
commuting from the suburbs is linked to higher
blood pressure, lower frustration tolerance,
and higher rates of anxiety.
Also, the suburbs are no longer the countryside
havens that they once were.
They’re just a continuation of the urban
sprawl.
Rich Americans are therefore beginning to
return to the city.
With lower crime rates, higher fuel costs,
and an overall shift in attitude, urban cores
are having a second renaissance.
So that’s why we live where we do.
It’s a complicated, controversial, and surprisingly
political history.
I hope you enjoyed this Wendover Production
video.
I first need to thank my amazing sponsor—the
Great Courses Plus.
The Great Courses Plus is a subscription on-demand
video learning service where you can watch
unlimited top-notch courses from Ivy League
Professors, National Geographic Scientists,
Culinary Institute of America Chefs, and hundreds
more highly qualified individuals.
If you enjoyed this video, I highly recommend
the course on Cultural and Human Geography.
It’s a super-interesting topic, and this
course absolutely does it justice.
You can watch this or any other of the hundreds
of courses for free when you sign up for a
30-day free trial using the link www.thegreatcoursesplus.com/wendover
or the link is also in the description.
I also recently started a Patreon which you
can go to by clicking here.
There are a bunch of great rewards like early
access to videos, stickers, t-shirts, and
best of all, every dollar contributed over
there goes right back into the channel.
Aside from that, please follow me on Twitter
@WendoverPro, watch my last video on the story
behind the 787 and a380 planes, check out
my fan-moderated subreddit at www.Reddit.com/WendoverProductions,
and most of all, subscribe to this channel.
Thanks again for watching, and I’ll see
you in two weeks for another Wendover Productions
video.

Definitions and issues

Demographia defines an urban area (urbanized area agglomeration or urban centre) as a continuously built up land mass of urban development that is within a labor market (i.e. metropolitan area or metropolitan region), without regard for administrative boundaries (i.e. municipality, city or commune). Except in Australia, the authorities use a minimum urban density definition of 400 persons per square kilometer (or the nearly identical 1,000 per square mile in the United States). Demographia uses maps and satellite photographs to estimate continuous urbanization. Demographia also uses small area population data, where available, to match population estimates to urbanized land area. National census authority data are presented in Australia, Canada, France, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States. Census of India urban agglomerations are not used in some cases because the geographical size of constituent units (municipalities) often includes large rural (non-urban) areas.

Sources for population estimates and land area definitions are coded by letter in the Table below, respectively.

B: Demographia land area estimate based upon map or satellite photograph analysis.

C: Demographia population estimate from lower order jurisdictions, including reduction for rural areas.

D: Population estimate based upon the United Nations agglomeration estimate.

E: Demographia population estimate from national census authority data.

F: Other Demographia population estimate, such as from unofficial local reports.

L: Demographia population estimate from local authority data.

N: Combined urban area using national census authority data.

W: Population estimate based upon the World Bank Urban Area 2015 estimate.

The estimates are quite different from the list of World's largest urban agglomerations produced by the United Nations that reports inconsistently on urban geographic, despite its reference to agglomerations. This is evident, for example, in Manila, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, Seoul and Moscow, where the UN data are for political jurisdictions, rather than urban areas. In other cases, the UN data is for metropolitan area, which are larger than urban areas (such as in Brazil). Finally, the United Nations data is incomplete, excluding some significant urban areas (such as Essen–Düsseldorf in Germany).[citation needed]

According to the report, there are 875 identified urban areas in the world with 500,000 or more population as of 2013. Demographia released along with the report include a disclaimer that this list of data is compiled on best available information, the vary nature of which is changing rapidly and quality is improving as it becomes available, yet still remains highly variable between nations, and hefty revisions are not unforeseen for the future. Appropriate caution is therefore advised.

^Various international sources limit their population estimates to DKI Jakarta itself (the national capital district). However, the urbanization of Jakarta extends into the regencies of Tangerang, Bekasi, Bogor and Karawang and the separate cities of Bekasi, Depok and Bogor. Excludes urban areas of Karawang (650,000; 207 km2) and Serang (525,000; 65 km2).

^The population is higher than other agglomeration estimates (such as the United Nations and the Philippine Statistics Authority). The continuous urbanization of Manila extends outward into other neighbouring provinces such as Bulacan, Cavite, Laguna, Rizal and Batangas provinces. The Demographia population estimate is a "build-up" of municipality population within the continuously developed area (urban area or agglomeration).

^ abcdHong Kong in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and Shenzhen are treated as separate urban areas because of the lack of freedom of labor movement without trade, immigration or customs barriers. Guangzhou–Foshan, Shenzhen, Dongguan and Zhongshan are also treated as separate urban areas which constitute the Pearl River Delta economic zone. While Guangzhou and Foshan are combined into a single urban area because they have become more economically integrated than the other urban areas, other areas in the Pearl River Delta economic region remain classified as separate urban areas. Thus, urban areas of Huizhou (1,387,000; 168 km2), Zhuhai (1,274,000; 246 km2) and Zhaoqing (500,000; 65 km2) as well as urban areas of Jiangmen (920,000; 259 km2) and Taishan (204,000; 44 km2) within the prefecture-level city of Jiangmen, urban area of Lishui (300,000; 44 km2) within the prefecture-level city of Foshan and urban are of Macau (560,000; 21 km2) in the Macau Special Administrative Region are excluded. Urban area of Guangzhou–Foshan includes Shunde within the prefecture-level city of Foshan, which has been excluded in the 2011 edition. Urban area of Shenzhen includes Huiyang within the prefecture-level city of Huizhou, which has been excluded in the 2010 edition. Urban area of Huizhou includes only Huicheng District. The Demographia estimate for Dongguan is lower than last year, because local estimates previously used were higher than reported in the 2010 census.

^Includes urban area of Narayanganj which has been excluded in the 2011 edition.

^Includes Nara and Himeji. United Nations estimates separate Osaka–Kobe and Kyoto and exclude both Nara and Himeji. Excludes urban area of Ōtsu (775,000; 303 km2) and Wakayama (430,000; 91 km2).

^The population estimate is suspect, due to the lack of readily available data for local areas outside the city jurisdiction (Moscow Oblast). Demographia is indebted to Richard Forstall, who has provided local authority area population data for portions of Moscow Oblast within the Moscow urban areas. Other estimates (such as the United Nations estimate) include only the municipality of Moscow, which includes only part of the urban footprint. Includes Elektrostal–Noginsk within Moscow Oblast, which has been excluded in the 2011 edition.

^Tianjin and Tangshan are treated as separate urban areas. Urban areas of Cangzhou (500,000; 130 km2) and Langfang (465,000; 130 km2) as well as urban area of Qian'an (400,000; 168 km2) within the prefecture-level city of Tangshan are also excluded. The population of the urban area of Tianjin is lower than other estimates (such as the United Nations), which include metropolitan area population not within the continuously developed urban area. The Demographia population estimate is a "build-up" of sub-municipality population within the continuously developed area (urban area or agglomeration).

^The population is lower than other estimates (such as the United Nations), which include metropolitan area population not within the continuously developed urban area.

^Johannesburg–East Rand and Pretoria are treated as separate urban areas which constitute the Vaal Triangle. Urban area of Vereeninging (Emfuleni) (650,000; 337 km2) is also excluded.

^Excludes urban area of Wanzhou (Wanxian) (500,000; 41 km2) within the municipality of Chongqing. The direct-controlled municipality of Chongqing, which is sometimes translated as the direct-controlled city of Chongqing, has the largest population of any organism called a city in the stretches far beyond any reasonable definition of a metropolitan area.

^The population is higher than other estimates (such as the United Nations), which do not include all population within the continuously developed urban area (especially in New Taipei City). Includes Taoyuan and Jhongli (Chungli) which have been excluded in the 2010 edition. Excludes urban area of Hsinchu (650,000; 117 km2).

^The population is higher than other agglomeration estimates (such as the United Nations), which does not include all of the continuously developed urban area in the state of Selangor. Continuous urbanization extends well beyond the municipality of Kuala Lumpur, for example to Port Klang and the area represents a single labor market (metropolitan area). The Demographia population estimate is a "build-up" of municipality population within the continuously developed area (urban area or agglomeration). Excludes urban area of Seremban (500,000; 155 km2).

^Includes Shishi and Jinjiang within the prefecture-level city of Quanzhou.

^Essen–Düsseldorf and Cologne–Bonn are treated as separate urban areas which constitute the Rhine-Ruhr metropolitan area. Excludes urban area of Aachen–Vaals (585,000; 401 km2) in both Germany and the Netherlands.

^The population is higher than other agglomeration estimates (such as the United Nations), which does not include all of the continuously developed urban area, which stretches into Como, Lecco and Varese provinces. Excludes Bergamo which has been included in the 2007 edition (4,950,000; 3,043 km2 in total).